WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1428/97 by Mirja RYYNÄNEN to the Commission. Impact of the revision of the directive on the sulphur content of petrol and diesel oil on fuel for vehicles and, by extension, farming and forestry industry costs in Finland
Date: 1997-04-16
Institutions: European Parliament, RYYNAENEN
Subjects: EC Directive, Finland, agricultural machinery, air quality, diesel fuel, international standard, petrol, pollution control, product quality, sulphur













EUR-Lex - 91997E1428 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1428

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1428/97 by Mirja RYYNÄNEN to the Commission. Impact of the revision of the directive on the sulphur content of petrol and diesel oil on fuel for vehicles and, by extension, farming and forestry industry costs in Finland  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0127 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1428/97 by Mirja Ryynänen (ELDR) to the Commission (16 April 1997)Subject: Impact of the revision of the directive on the sulphur content of petrol and diesel oil on fuel for vehicles and, by extension, farming and forestry industry costs in FinlandThe aim of the revision of directive on the sulphur content of petrol and diesel oil (93/12/EEC) ((OJ L 74, 27.3.1993, p. 81. )) is to improve the quality of the air in the EU. One feature of the revision is a tightening-up of the quality requirements for diesel fuels. Tractors, combine harvesters and forest tractors must use fuel which complies with the quality requirements for diesel oil, rather than heating oil as they do at present. The aim is a perfectly reasonable one in the many EU countries where the quality of heating oil is significantly worse than that of diesel oil. In Finland, with its cold climate, the situation is different. The vast majority (85%) of off-road vehicles use heating oil which already meets the quality requirements for diesel oil. The product is the same, only the tax is different. The current system works well, and in our country the directive would bring about only marginal environmental improvements.Were the directive to be adopted, farming and forestry industry production costs would rise, since users would be forced to switch to fuels on which a higher rate of tax is levied. The refund of the tax paid would obviously give rise to costs which would have to be reclaimed from users, so that the tax could not be refunded in full.1. How does the Commission intend to prevent this unfair situation, for which there is no proper justification?2. From an environmental point of view, would it not be better to draw up a directive on light oils for use in heating and vehicles which stipulates that such oils should meet the same environmental quality requirements as diesel oil?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1997)1. There are environmental reasons, relating to air quality improvement, for including off-road vehicles and tractors (as defined in Directive 74/150/EEC ((OJ L 84, 28.3.1974. ))) alongside road vehicles among the users of the diesel fuel covered by the proposed amendment to Directive 93/12/EEC ((Doc COM(96) 248 final. )), the purpose of which is to harmonize national requirements.Unfortunately, in spite of the benefits to be derived from future measures relating to road vehicles (under the Auto Oil programme) and off-road vehicles (arising from the proposal on non-road mobile machinery ((COM(95) 350 final. ))), pollution by emissions of nitrogen oxides (Nox) and particulates (PM) from off-road vehicles and tractors is expected to reach the same level, in all Member States by the year 2010, as pollution from road vehicles.A stricter requirement regarding the sulphur content of fuels, as proposed in the amendment to Directive 93/12/EEC, will cut particulate (PM) emissions by 10% (in terms of weight).In Finland, off-road vehicles and tractors account for 15% of all Nox emissions and 5% of all particulate emissions - a not insignificant contribution. These vehicles also account for 20% of Finland's diesel oil consumption. The sulphur content of the diesel oil used as fuel for off-road vehicles and tractors has been optimized, and is now less than 500 ppm- i.e. the level currently permitted for DERV fuel. The trend is therefore in the direction of the figure put forward by the Commission in its proposal for an amendment to Directive 93/12/EEC, namely 350 ppm by the year 2000.2. A reduction in the sulphur content of light oils, normally used for heating, was recently considered as part of the Community strategy for combating acidification. The conclusion reached was not to propose any change in the present sulphur content (0.2% by weight), though six Member States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom) considered it would be cost-effective to lower the present limit value. Member States can, of course, impose stricter standards in this field in order to attain their own objectives, provided they comply with Community rules.With regard to air quality, the 'Auto Oil II' programme is committed to investigating the extent to which fixed sources, as well as mobile ones, contribute to air pollution. This programme has only recently got underway and it would be premature to prejudge what cost-effective measures (technical and non-technical) will be recommended as a result of the research.